Question

Which statement best evaluates the author's response to the counterclaim that antibiotics promote growth and health in livestock?

Responses

It is effective because the author illustrates how farmers could achieve livestock growth and health without giving livestock antibiotics.
It is effective because the author illustrates how farmers could achieve livestock growth and health without giving livestock antibiotics.

It is ineffective because the author exaggerates the impact of antibiotic use in livestock, implying that it will cause premature death.
It is ineffective because the author exaggerates the impact of antibiotic use in livestock, implying that it will cause premature death.

It is effective because the author uses facts and statistics from reliable sources to refute the counterclaim.
It is effective because the author uses facts and statistics from reliable sources to refute the counterclaim.

It is ineffective because the author implies that by giving livestock antibiotics, farmers promote superbug formation, which is inaccurate.
It is ineffective because the author implies that by giving livestock antibiotics, farmers promote superbug formation, which is inaccurate.

Answer 1

It is effective because the author uses facts and statistics from reliable sources to refute the counterclaim.

Reason: Citing reliable data directly weakens the claim that antibiotics are necessary for growth/health by providing evidence-based alternatives or showing minimal benefit, which is a stronger rebuttal than anecdote or assertion.